Analytical jurisprudence and its discontents

This chapter identifies and explains three of the most important and recent challenges to the project of analytical jurisprudence, conceived as an exercise in conceptual analysis: (i) the objection that disputes about the boundaries of the concept of law are simply irresolvable, which in turn shows that conceptual analysis of law ought to be given up; (ii) the objection that conceptual analysis employs two problematic epistemological devices – a sharp distinction between analytic and synthetic truths and appeals to intuition; and finally, (iii) the objection that the sheer variety of types of law makes pursuit of a single essence or concept of law meaningless.